Holder Wants To Pack The Court

[Ambivalent1]

It's also NOT HAPPENING.

That would be an open declaration of war on the U.S. Constitution.

Do you think that the Constitution mandates the number of SCOTUS Justices?

If so you are wrong as usual

The problem you hate filled twits have is that EVERYTIME you don't get your way you want to change the rules.

 

[occupied]

Not that I think it's a good idea I have to wonder what the remedy could be for how republicans have betrayed the supposedly nonpartisan spirit of American jurisprudence.

^
|
|
Reeks of 75 years of hypocricy.

If democrats had mounted an operation to pack the federal courts and steal a SC court nomination as republicans have you would be freaking out. There will be a reckoning for their fuckery.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Like the last Democrat attempt to cheat here, it will not be permitted.

Eric Holder Calls on Democrats To Pack the Supreme Court with Socialists - Big League Politics

After what McConnell did with his naked partisanship regarding Garland/Gorsuch/Kavanaugh...there is a strong case to add seats t the SCOTUS

And it is neither illegal nor unprecedented

"McConnell went 'nuclear' to confirm Gorsuch. But Democrats changed Senate filibuster rules first."

"In 2013, Senate Democrats — then in the majority — triggered the nuclear option for the first time."

McConnell went 'nuclear' to confirm Gorsuch. But Democrats changed Senate filibuster rules first.

 

[Lesh]

The PeeWee Herman "Youuuuuu did it FUUUURSTTTTT" defense is weak.

McConnell was obstructing lower court appointments and even Cabinet positions in unprecedented ways. There was only two choices. Nuke the lower court filibusters or surrender to McConnell's naked partisanship.

Of course McConnell simply extended his partisan power grab to the Supreme Court and enlarging the court may be the only remedy

 

[Ambivalent1]

The PeeWee Herman "Youuuuuu did it FUUUURSTTTTT" defense is weak.

McConnell was obstructing lower court appointments and even Cabinet positions in unprecedented ways. There was only two choices. Nuke the lower court filibusters or surrender to McConnell's naked partisanship.

Of course McConnell simply extended his partisan power grab to the Supreme Court and enlarging the court may be the only remedy

You are a confirmed asshole, it was ok when your side did it but it's bad when the other side does. You children hate rules that don't let you get your way. Tough shit

 

[Auld Phart]

The PeeWee Herman "Youuuuuu did it FUUUURSTTTTT" defense is weak.

McConnell was obstructing lower court appointments and even Cabinet positions in unprecedented ways. There was only two choices. Nuke the lower court filibusters or surrender to McConnell's naked partisanship.

Of course McConnell simply extended his partisan power grab to the Supreme Court and enlarging the court may be the only remedy

and enlarging the court may be the only remedy

Enlarging the only way?

interesting.


So, if they increased the number of justices on the Supreme Court while Republicans still hold the Senate would mean they would pick some Democrats for those seats?

 

[Lesh]

They won't pick partisan Republicans...which is what Republicans .do all the time

 

[Lesh]

Garland was a Moderate

How liberal is Merrick Garland?

 

[Ambivalent1]

They won't pick partisan Republicans...which is what Republicans .do all the time

EVERYTHING that helps your side is good, everything that doesn't is "bad". That about cover it?

 

[The Original Tree]

The Idea is to allow Open Immigration and pack America full of Antisemites, AntiChristians AntiAmericans, and then out vote people in their districts to install Socialists in Government. Who will then install Socialists in our Court Systems. You see it already with every action The President takes being challenged in The Courts. It is a long term plan, that will take a while to be accomplished.

They had so much success with Obama they got too full of themselves, and this is why you saw them launch a COUP against The President, and why they continue to obstruct government and The President's Agenda at all costs. I really don't think these people care if they go to jail or not.

To them, they are fighting a Holy War, a Jihad against The Evil American Empire, which must be Converted to a Benign and Oppressive Socialist State, that really won't be benign at all.

 

[Ambivalent1]

They won't pick partisan Republicans...which is what Republicans .do all the time

So Sotomayor and Kagan aren't partisan?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

With all the bragging from right wingers about Trump's choices for the Supreme Court, the irony of complaining about court stuffing is just dripping from every post.

What irony?

G'morning billy. Happy Daylight Savings Time Day!

Same to ya. Let's make it permanent.

The threats and anger over SCOTUS stuffing by Congress depends on who holds the Oval Office. The name Merrick Garland will (and should be) be floating around cyberspace long after I'm gone as a rallying cry.

Obama was a unique problem, to be dealt with in unique, absolutely legal ways. The same for the current Democratic Party. I do not support the path upon which they are attempting to set the country.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Like the last Democrat attempt to cheat here, it will not be permitted.

Eric Holder Calls on Democrats To Pack the Supreme Court with Socialists - Big League Politics

This is why you NEVER, EVER, EVER vote for a democrat for president.

They will find a way to cheat and get rid of the constitution they so emphatically hate.

Don't do it.

.

I don't vote for them for any office.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Not that I think it's a good idea I have to wonder what the remedy could be for how republicans have betrayed the supposedly nonpartisan spirit of American jurisprudence.

Under current circumstances non-partisanship is akin to eating Quaaludes like Beer-Nuts.

 

[Lesh]

They won't pick partisan Republicans...which is what Republicans .do all the time

EVERYTHING that helps your side is good, everything that doesn't is "bad". That about cover it?

You're projecting

 

[PoliticalChic]

With all the bragging from right wingers about Trump's choices for the Supreme Court, the irony of complaining about court stuffing is just dripping from every post.

Not seeing "irony"? Keeping the USSC at 9 justices is normal. Adding justices so the USSC is 11, 13 or even 15 members is what is termed "packing". FDR tried to get as many as 15 justices, but that plan was rejected by the House and Senate as interfering with the independence of the courts.

BRIA 10 4 a FDR Tries to "Pack" the Supreme Court - Constitutional Rights Foundation

"On February 5, 1937, President Franklin Roosevelt announces a controversial plan to expand the Supreme Court to as many as 15 judges, allegedly to make it more efficient. Critics immediately charged that Roosevelt was trying to “pack” the court and thus neutralize Supreme Court justices hostile to his New Deal."

Indeed. It was blocked. Where is the irony in blocking it again?

If passed by the Democrats, where is the irony is refusing to comply with an arbitrarily expanded court's rulings?

"....packing the court with AOC think alikes..."


I detect an oxymoron in there....

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Garland was a Moderate

How liberal is Merrick Garland?

According to you people, all Democrats are moderate.

 

[Rustic]

Like the last Democrat attempt to cheat here, it will not be permitted.

Eric Holder Calls on Democrats To Pack the Supreme Court with Socialists - Big League Politics

The Sorry fucker is a spineless coward...

 

[Rustic]

Not that I think it's a good idea I have to wonder what the remedy could be for how republicans have betrayed the supposedly nonpartisan spirit of American jurisprudence.

McConnell held a SCOTUS seat open for a year in order to deny Garland, a moderate, a seat...and then changed filibuster rules in order to seat Gorsuch and Kavanaugh...both right wing partisans

Garland was a flaming progressive shit stain... Wanted to eliminate the second amendment

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It's also NOT HAPPENING.

That would be an open declaration of war on the U.S. Constitution.

Do you think that the Constitution mandates the number of SCOTUS Justices?

If so you are wrong as usual

Of course not.

Do you think it's gonna happen?

If so, you're stupid as ususal.